ITT: PSEUDO KINO/DISHONEST FILMMAKING

>>85108699
It's better on a second watch
Also good for what it is

File: inarritu-main.jpg (31KB, 680x478px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 680x478px

>dude it's all one shot lmao
>dude we shot in the cold lmao

Is there a bigger hack in all of cinema?

Good if you aren't hyped up in memes

>>85108699
La La Land desu
Also fuck Trump he's dishonest too

what does dishonest filmmaking even mean

>unique score that fits and drives the pacing of the movie
>cool use of the cinematic medium to make the film visually feel like a play, tailoring the cinematography to the subject matter
>interesting central conflict of an actor having to come to terms with the fact that he's a washed-up hack in the face of snoody elites

Why wouldn't a /TV/er like this movie? Simple: it is popular so they have to be an edgy contrarian.

>>85109274
>>85109291
Dishonest Filmmaking
(Tarantino, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Wes Anderson, Christopher Nolan, Alex Garland, Paul Thomas Anderson, Nicholas Refn, Tom Hooper, Tyler Perry, Rian Johnson, Alfonso Cuaron, Noah Baumbach, Andrea Arnold, David Yates, Denis Vilenueve, James Franco, Steve McQueen) are intellectually bankrupt moral whores and charlatans; their films appeal to the modern phenomenon of the 'Pretend Epic' or Pseudo Cinema, often tied to the criticism that "It was a movie that thought it was a film" they have no ideas of their own and are filmed purely to have fancy essays made about them. They obfuscate their lack of insight under a smug impenetrable irony and often contain scenes with disingenuous attempts at depth with characters spouting platitudes that the director takes VERY seriously.
This directly panders to the IMDb reddit sensibility of quote circlejerking since these hacks are masters of the fools wit, "Quipping" (Not to be confused with the marvel co-opting of the word) , it sounds smart, cool and worldly but in reality there's nothing of substance, the Revenant's attempt at spiritualism was cheap and laughable and whilst someone like Malick has considered his philosophy, Inaurritu wears his introspection on his sleeve to give his film a false sense of depth with pathetic sermonising.

THIS is Dishonest Filmmaking.

They leech the greater works that preceded them; like The Enemy being a rip off Eraserhead, but they have nothing else to say.
They act under the guise of deconstruction with surface layer obvious 'social commentary' and a quirky forgettable score praised as 'innovative'. They are all inauthentic sycophants that rely on oscar buzz and post 9/11 detachment for relevance.

These directors are hacks and will be forgotten to time.


Some notably earnest filmmakers include, but are not limited to

>Mike Leigh
>The Coen Brothers
>Werner Herzog
>James Cameron
>Mel Gibson
>Terrence Malick
>Gaspar Noe
>Clint Eastwood

@85109371
Look everyone the megaautist who likes Refn and Harmony Korine and Malick

>>85108699
The only memorable BP oscar winner of the last 7 years. Think about that before you spew your pleb thoughts out loud.

>>85109371
>Honest filmmakers
>Mel Gibson
>Coen Brothers
>Terrence Malik
>James Cameron

DUDE IM MEMEING LMAO AYY

>>85109274
Anti-egoist takeaways given to the audience by the ambitious director and rich actors.

>>85109371
>Terrence Malick

WEW

>>85109371
It was a well shot film with very good performances. I didn't like the ending though. Not because of its magical realism or whatever but because everything after he shot himself felt tacked on and unnecessary. Up until that point the film felt like it was getting more and more intense, and all that shit just felt like an unnecessary coda.

I know Edward Nortons glory days are over but I still can't believe he was in this piece of shit

>>85109274
Nothing. These pseudo-intellectual retards will apply any meme phrase to anything they disagree with and call it an argument.
there are also shitposting retards everywhere, dont forget

>>85109371
>earnest filmmakers
>The Coen Brothers
>James Cameron
>Gaspar Noe

now why did you have to go and ruin it like that

>>85109371
>>Gaspar Noe
I've only seen Enter the Void and it was fucking stupid. DUDE WHAT IF LIKE AFTER WE DIE...

>>85109371
Very accurate
only the most tasteless drone would disagree

>>85108820
But the continuous tracking shots in this film are pretty gorgeous and do an excellent job of recreating the simultaneously comfy and claustrophobic feel of the back of a theatre house.

So, I mean, what's your point?

>>85109527
Lol okay then...

Be honest with yourself the film was a pile of faeces and you only pretended to like it to look deep and intelligent.

>>85109636
Because he didn't just want to mention some washed out directors that make boring movies. No idea why he included Noe though.

>>85109636
The Coen Brothers are excellent. You don't like them because they're mainstream, faggot.

>>85109688
Dare I say it, the last great filmmakers?

Lynch is great too, but lets be honest, season 3 of Twin Peaks is probably gonna be his swan song.

Batman vs Superman

>>85109680
No, I watched it 'cause I like Keaton and it had been a long time since I went to the theater, and I enjoyed it. That's all.
You sound like a dishonest viewer.

>>85109657
T. Samefag
>>85109688
Coens are as hack as can be, reddito

>>85109371

The worst part about pasta like this is that it wasn't even worth clapboarding the first time it was autistically regurgitated. So even as an exercise in shitposting it fails.

>>85109371
What do you expect from film? Philosophy? You're fucking dumb as hell, philosophy hasn't had a place in our culture since Derrida.

>>85109680
get filtered

>>85109685
Gasper's films capture the spirit of adolescence with authenticity.

File: I+dunno+man+i+went+back+and+watched+it+not+_18f06daf22b4e81b5eb1732a2cb9525f.jpg (28KB, 350x304px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 350x304px

>>85108699
Not gonna lie was pretty disappointed when I found out it wasn't actually about birdman

File: IMG_5417.jpg (75KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 600x450px

Is the dishonest filmmaking pasta dishonest?

>>85109848
All of their shit is highly entertaining and orignal. You are a contrarian's contrarian. Fuck off

>>85109757
Spielberg is pretty great

>>85109863
And that's due to the pervading nihilism exhibited by the 'film' makers I have mentioned above, Cinema can be a powerful stirring form of being that can mould and change a man and that is simply NOT going to happen with people like Denis Vilenueve making movies.

>>85110073
>Cinema can be a powerful stirring form of being that can mould and change a man
You write like shit. Stop pretending to be Mr. Profound, you're hardly articulate. You are Mr. Adverb like every other internet intellectual. Go take a mooc in writing - pay attention to the part where they say use adverbs sparingly.
Also, what the fuck are you talking about? "Powerful stirring form of being"? Jesus Christ, get a fucking life

>>85110415
Let me guess you're 21? Come back when you've actually had enough experience with the world to precipitate a dialogue that actually contains a morsel of intellectual fortitude, emotional honesty and sincerity .

>>85110628
>the autist thinks spending 20 hours a day here shitposting with pastas and memes is life experience
Also several directors you called out as nihilistic are the opposite, autist and those you said weren't are.

>>85110628
>morsel of intellectual fortitude
>emotional honesty
Stop writing like this you fucking retard.
Also, I realized just stupid that orignal quote is.
>>Cinema can be a powerful stirring form of being that can mould and change a man
>using "can" twice
>powerful stirring
lmao
>powerful stirring form of being
This doesn't make sense
>that can mould and change a man
Mould AND change. Wow, so profound
>that can mould and change a man
Literally everything does this. Everything is constantly changing so 1) you're wrong, film must, not can change and mould men 2) the basis for your gripe with American cinema today isn't true 3) "can mould and change is man" is such a stupid phrase, I can't get over this; how the fuck did you think typing this bullshit was worthwhile? Fucking hell

>>85110978
There's nothing wrong now with using can in a senetence twice. Cinema CAN transcend narrative and broadcast phenemonogical qualia to the user in question, this is documented so you're the one who comes up short kiddo. Cinema IS Existentialism and wilfully disregarding this, in order to resume a dailance with apathy and diminintuity, isnt just immature but its nihilistic, and unemotional.

>>85110628

>being this intellectually disingenuous

Anyone else think birdman wasn't really that smart and not pretentious at all? It was just a fun little movie with a dumpy main character

>>85111413
>DUDE SMELLS LIKE BALLS XD

It was shit.

>>85109659
A lot of them are unnecessary and/or impractical and do more to show off than serve the narrative or aesthetic. A good director knows when to cut and when to hold I shot. I think innarutu uses the long take far too liberally and it hinders the experience at certain points. Here's a good video that sort of explains it:
https://youtu.be/rzh_PB6XDuY

>>85111453

lmao!

>>85111157
There is when it reads like shit. In your case you shouldn't have used it once because what you said isn't true and if it were true it was horribly stated.
>phenemonogical qualia [sic]
Redundant
>Cinema CAN transcend narrative and broadcast phenemonogical qualia
How do this relate to anything you said before?
>to the user in question
What the fuck am I reading?
>in order to resume a dailance with apathy and diminintuity [sic]
lmao
Firstly, apathy is cool. Secondly, everything within the human paradigm is inherently diminutive and emotional.
>Cinema IS Existentialism
You're begging the question you fucking idiot.

>>85110978
>>85110892
>>85110415
>I am inept
>I have not read Shakespeare nor Tolstoy
>I did not go to University

>>85108820
He's the biggest hack

File: wut.png (141KB, 172x344px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 172x344px

>>85109957
this lmao. didn't know at first. when i heard it was well-received, i was like what the fuck? a birdman movie?

>>85111413
keaton is based, i was probably going to like it no matter what

autism: the thread

>>85111813
LOL hes a washed up sucky shit

>>85111705
>this is the height of /tv/ intellectuality
Such a shit board. What a fucking joke

File: 1499112890714.gif (978KB, 245x170px) Image search: [Google]

978KB, 245x170px

>>85111842

>>85111705
In no way is Shakespeare profound and going to college does not make you perceptive to anything you'd consider "deep."

File: 06636CFD-1EEC-461D-92E3-90B373F7DC2E-396-00000042CA19A21D.gif (2MB, 312x250px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 312x250px

>>85112411
>In no way is Shakespeare profound

Tell me something deep then you incalculable moron.

That's right I know Dostoyevsky and you don't.

>>85112501
>deep
Not a thing. "Deep" is the artistic/philosophical equivalent of "math makes my head hurt."
Anything can be insightful depending on one's knowledge/experience. In the 21st century Shakespeare isn't going to be insightful for anyone. His most impressive feats are cliches for us.

>>85112740
Yeahhhh you sound like someone who has either not read or not understood Shakespeare. Get educated Fucko.

>>85110073
>The Coen Brothers
>Not nihilistic
Do you even care about putting some coherence into your "theory", or you just like to throw buzzwords around and try to force directors into categories that make you feel superior for liking them or not?